Vincent J. Curtis
27 Sept 22
In preparation for another “Truth and Reconciliation” Day, I’m going to offer some Truth, and leave the Reconciliation to others. The truth concerns three treaties or agreements that were made in quick success in 1701. The first is the Great Treaty of Montreal, signed on 4 August, 1701, the second is the Dish with One Spoon Wampum treaty, which may have been concluded in 1702, and the third is the so-called Nanfan treaty, signed 19 July 1701.
To understand the run up to these treaties, one must know of the intensity of the Beaver Wars of the 17th century. Indian bands were trapping beaver and selling the pelts to either the English or the French. It was big business, big enough for organized battles and raids to control hunting territories.
The Iroquois traded with the English, but by the latter 17th century had hunted beaver in their tradition grounds to extinction. They needed to go farther afield to find more, which brought them into conflict with tribes allied with the French. In the last two decades of the 17th century, the Iroquois started to get the worst of it, especially when the French lent their military power to aid their Indian allies. A peace agreement was deemed preferable to all, and hence the Great Peace of Montreal was arranged.
The Great Peace of Montreal was a peace treaty between New France and 39 Indian bands that ended the Beaver Wars of the 17th century. The principle was one of sharing the hunting grounds. It was signed in Montreal on August 4, 1701. The French agreed to act as arbiter during conflicts with signatory tribes, which included the Iroquois and Mississaugas.
The Dish with One Spoon Wampum treaty appears to be a side deal between the Iroquois and the Mississaugas of the Credit (the Mississaugas say it was made with the Mohawks only), and this treaty was in the spirit of the Montreal Treaty, the sharing of hunting grounds. The Mississaugas agreed to share their hunting grounds with the Iroquois, in particular the “land between the lakes.”
In the so-called Nanfan Treaty, the Iroquois attempted to gain the protection of the English against the French and their allied Indian bands in their use of territory claimed by the Mississaugas - and incorporated in the Dish with One Spoon Wampum treaty. It was signed before Dish with One Spoon was concluded, and is contrary to the spirit of Dish with One Spoon.
In no sense is the Nanfan Treaty a “treaty.” It does not engage the English Crown. To engage the Crown what was required was a Letters Patent from King William III of England to John Nanfan, appointing him as the King’s plenipotentiary to negotiate a treaty with certain Indian bands concerning certain matters. That Letters Patent doesn’t exist.
What the “treaty” actually is, is a surrender of title of lands the Iroquois didn’t actually possess. Specifically, the Iroquois Nations deed to the English Crown their title to Beaver Hunting grounds that they acquired by right of conquest in the 17th century, which saw the annihilation of the Huron Nation in 1649. This territory included the Niagara Peninsula, all of South-Western Ontario (the “Land between the Lakes”), the Bruce Peninsula, and the north shore of Lake Ontario as far east as Oshawa. This and more was part of New France at the time, and claimed, as well as occupied, by Algonquinian allies, which included the Mississaugas of the Credit. Much of this territory was subject to the Dish with One Spoon Wampum treaty.
The Iroquois “voluntarily surrendered, delivered up, and by these presents do for us, our heirs and successors forever, quit claimed onto the King of England forever all the right, title, and interest and all claims and demands whatsoever.” That’s pretty definitive, and raises the question why would the Iroquois surrender title in exchange, apparently, for nothing (albeit land that wasn’t theirs)? It was ostensibly offered as a gift to the King William III of England, his heir and successors, out of an admiration for him.
Looking deeper, the answer seems to be that is was a way for the Iroquois to engage British help to protect hunting and fishing territory, which, up until then the Iroquois had to defend on their own. A shrewd idea brought forth by the Chiefs themselves.
The Sir William Johnson Papers include the following passage: “At a public meeting with Lt Govr Nanfan at Albany, they put all their Patrimonial Lands and those obtained by conquest under the Protection of the King of Great Britain, to be by him secured for the use of them and their heirs against the encroachments and ambitious designs of the French.” They sought exclusive access to the hunting grounds. However, the British did nothing to protect them.
To those familiar with the concept of “Indian giving,” surrendering title of land that isn’t yours and might belong to somebody else is standard technique. The Iroquois were surrounding title of land belonging to the Mississaugas and the future subject of the Dish with One Spoon treaty, including the “land between the lakes.” Through the Nanfan agreement, the Iroquois were hoping that the British would use their military strength to protect the Iroquois, their allies, from attacks by the French and their Indian allies. The payoff for the British, from the perspective of the Iroquois, for giving the Iroquois exclusive access to the land between the lakes was two-fold: first, the profitable beaver trade would pass through English hands, and the New York colony supposedly had title to lands as far west as present day Chicago, and as far north as Georgian Bay. The business of enforcing title was left to another time. But you can understand why William III would never have issued a Letters Patent with this issue in mind because pretending to dispose of territory claimed by King Louis XIV would amount to a casus belli with the Sun King, and Europe was then quacking under the problems of the Spanish succession.
Because the British did not protect the Iroquois in the manner the Iroquois wanted, the Mississaugas were never confronted with a joint Iroquois-British military force to acquaint them with the new arrangements that were contrary to Dish with One Spoon and the Great Treaty of Montreal.
The territory of New France was settled by the Peace of Paris of 1763, and the frontier of New York State with British North America was settled at the conclusion of the American Revolution by the Treaty of Paris of 1783. The Nanfan agreement was rendered nearly meaningless.
At the end of it, the Iroquois only hurt themselves
in their duplicity with, among others, the Mississaugas. The Nanfan Treaty is sometimes invoked today by
elements of Six Nations to harass the municipalities of Caledonia and Hamilton,
Ontario. The problem with Nanfan is that
the Crown was never engaged in the agreement, and the agreement was a gift of
land to the Crown, freely given, in perpetuity, title, sovereignty, and quit
claim. There is nothing in Nanfan the
Iroquois can rely on as their “treaty rights.”
-30-
“Wee say upon these and many other good motives
us hereunto moving have freely and voluntary surrendered delivered up and for
ever quit claimed, and by these presents doe for us our heirs and successors
absolutely surrender, deliver up and for ever quit claim unto our great Lord and
Master the King of England called by us Corachkoo and by the Christians William
the third and to his heirs and successors Kings and Queens of England for ever
all the right title and interest and all the claime and demand whatsoever which
wee the said five nations of Indians called the Maquase, Oneydes, Onnondages,
Cayouges and Sinnekes now have or which wee ever had or that our heirs or
successors at any time hereafter may or ought to have of in or to all that vast
Tract of land or Colony called Canagariarchio beginning on the northwest side
of Cadarachqui lake … etc.”
No comments:
Post a Comment